|
|
Post by nazcard on Nov 26, 2021 23:51:16 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Nov 27, 2021 8:31:47 GMT -6
Oh look, one of them came up with Testicle Tech. The originality!
Other than that they ain’t wrong. They see us as a bad team/roaster just like many of us here do. One noted that we shot 57% on 3’s vs UMASS and still barely held on. We don’t do much really well and even when we hit 3’s really well it’s still a struggle for us.
Isu hired a super successful d2 coach. I’m
Not sure their roster is any better than ours but it’ll be interesting to see Whit match Wits with a guy who can really build a program and coach. ISU expect them to win so we’ll see how this goes.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattg on Nov 27, 2021 8:58:16 GMT -6
Hard to tell how this game will go. ISU barely beat Green Bay (who lost every game at Jersey Mike’s). Since then they either won big or lost big…no other close games. They seem to be inconsistent just like us.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Nov 27, 2021 9:44:10 GMT -6
I see that Jake LaRavia is now with Wake Forest and has had a pretty good start to the year.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Nov 27, 2021 10:30:34 GMT -6
I'm going to propose a simple formula for assessing BSU's chances to win against any opponent on the schedule:
68-.1K = P
where K is the opponent's KenPom ranking and P is the percentage of 3pt shots BSU has to hit to win.
So, for example ISU is #166, and we have 68-(.1*166) = 51.4.
BSU will have to hit 51.4% threes to beat ISU.
I think this method would not work well for opponents in the upper reaches of the rankings. For example BSU would have to hit a lot better than 67.9% to beat somebody like Gonzaga or Purdue. But this is moot because there are no teams like that on the schedule.
But the formula tells you that BSU can beat the dogshit MAC West teams while hitting a percentage in their normal range in the high 30's, whereas they are going to have to hit upwards of 55% to be competitive with the MAC east teams or Toledo.
So the good news is BSU can sometimes beat the better MAC teams depending on a factor with a lot of natural variability. The bad news is that the team has no chance to have the consistency necessary to be a championship contender due to having a flawed roster and a coach with only one real idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Nov 27, 2021 11:18:10 GMT -6
To contend for a championship means being hot 3 games at the end of the season. Not sure consistency is the real key in that setting, not if we just focus on offense.
Can the team defend is a factor, and that is still an open question. Certainly we should improve there, certainly we have some athletes who in theory can defend.
That 3 point factor always gives a chance to the underdog. Creating fast game pace increases the chances. If you did not assume Whitford was an idiot, then building a team that can do those things makes sense. At least while we do not have an advantage in talent over other top MAC teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Nov 27, 2021 11:27:04 GMT -6
If you did not assume Whitford was an idiot, then building a team that can do those things makes sense. At least while we do not have an advantage in talent over other top MAC teams. And of course, we will eventually have that talent advantage, once Whitford has a chance to build the program. But, it's just too early in his tenure and we need to be patient. |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Nov 27, 2021 11:48:10 GMT -6
At some point people show who they are and what they can do. I think 8 years is enough time to discern that.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Nov 27, 2021 11:53:34 GMT -6
Yeah, whatever Herman. You've always had that instant gratification mindset.  |
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Nov 27, 2021 11:55:56 GMT -6
ISU fans figured out we are not very good. I guess after 20 years if not being very good we can’t sneak up on people anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Nov 27, 2021 12:05:56 GMT -6
Yeah, whatever Herman. You've always had that instant gratification mindset. I do have an Abbie normal brain. |
|
|
|
Post by mattg on Nov 27, 2021 12:16:34 GMT -6
I'm going to propose a simple formula for assessing BSU's chances to win against any opponent on the schedule: 68-.1K = P where K is the opponent's KenPom ranking and P is the percentage of 3pt shots BSU has to hit to win. So, for example ISU is #166, and we have 68-(.1*166) = 51.4. BSU will have to hit 51.4% threes to beat ISU. I think this method would not work well for opponents in the upper reaches of the rankings. For example BSU would have to hit a lot better than 67.9% to beat somebody like Gonzaga or Purdue. But this is moot because there are no teams like that on the schedule. But the formula tells you that BSU can beat the dogshit MAC West teams while hitting a percentage in their normal range in the high 30's, whereas they are going to have to hit upwards of 55% to be competitive with the MAC east teams or Toledo. So the good news is BSU can sometimes beat the better MAC teams depending on a factor with a lot of natural variability. The bad news is that the team has no chance to have the consistency necessary to be a championship contender due to having a flawed roster and a coach with only one real idea. This is an interesting concept. Where does the 68 come from in your idea though? |
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Nov 27, 2021 12:39:10 GMT -6
I'm going to propose a simple formula for assessing BSU's chances to win against any opponent on the schedule: 68-.1K = P where K is the opponent's KenPom ranking and P is the percentage of 3pt shots BSU has to hit to win. So, for example ISU is #166, and we have 68-(.1*166) = 51.4. BSU will have to hit 51.4% threes to beat ISU. I think this method would not work well for opponents in the upper reaches of the rankings. For example BSU would have to hit a lot better than 67.9% to beat somebody like Gonzaga or Purdue. But this is moot because there are no teams like that on the schedule. But the formula tells you that BSU can beat the dogshit MAC West teams while hitting a percentage in their normal range in the high 30's, whereas they are going to have to hit upwards of 55% to be competitive with the MAC east teams or Toledo. So the good news is BSU can sometimes beat the better MAC teams depending on a factor with a lot of natural variability. The bad news is that the team has no chance to have the consistency necessary to be a championship contender due to having a flawed roster and a coach with only one real idea. This is an interesting concept. Where does the 68 come from in your idea though? I used the fact that it took 56% to beat #120 UMass and my belief that teams around 300 can be beat with 38% shooting. The range between #120 and #300 is 180 and coincidentally the range between 56% and 38% is 18, so that yielded a nice factor of 0.1% per ranking spot as the sliding adjustment factor. Then I set the starting point (68) so that a game against #120 came out to the 56% demonstrated in the UMass game. Not sure if I explained that very clearly, but that's where it came from. Of course any team is more competitive against higher ranked opponents as they shoot a higher 3pt %. But I think it's particularly deterministic with BSU due to its lack of other offensive ideas. We will see how well this formula conforms to reality as the season progresses. |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Nov 27, 2021 12:42:38 GMT -6
It appears Indiana St is not a good team.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattg on Nov 27, 2021 12:44:14 GMT -6
This is an interesting concept. Where does the 68 come from in your idea though? I used the fact that it took 56% to beat #120 UMass and my belief that teams around 300 can be beat with 38% shooting. The range between #120 and #300 is 180 and coincidentally the range between 56% and 38% is 18, so that yielded a nice factor of 0.1% per ranking spot as the sliding adjustment factor. Then I set the starting point (68) so that a game against #120 came out to the 56% demonstrated in the UMass game. Not sure if I explained that very clearly, but that's where it came from. Of course any team is more competitive against higher ranked opponents as they shoot a higher 3pt %. But I think it's particularly deterministic with BSU due to its lack of other offensive ideas. We will see how well this formula conforms to reality as the season progresses. I appreciate the thoroughness! After watching this first half though, it looks promising that we can shoot at that clip. Might need to create another formula on how many missed layups the opponent needs for us to win as well. I guarantee whatever that formula is, ISU has reached that number already. They are way worse than us at finishing near the rim. |
|
